Legal Opinion

Scott v. Louisville Bedding Co.

Court of Appeals of Kentucky

Decided July 12, 2013No. 2012-CA-000252-MRPublishedCited by 5 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

OPINION

KELLER, Judge:

Hugh Scott (Scott) appeals from the circuit court’s orders denying his motion to compel arbitration. On appeal, Scott argues that an arbitration provision contained in an agreement entered into by Louisville Bedding Company (Bedding), United Re Trust, and United Re AG is enforceable and that he is entitled to enforce it. Bedding argues that the arbitration provision is not enforceable and, even if it is, Scott is not entitled to enforce it. Having reviewed the record and the arguments of the parties, we agree with the circuit court that Scott is not entitled to enforce…

2Cases cited21 opinions

  1. Hertz Corp. v. FriendSupreme Court of the United States · 2010
  2. Securities & Exchange Commission v. National Securities, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1969
  3. United States Department of Treasury v. FabeSupreme Court of the United States · 1993
  4. Conseco Finance Servicing Corp. v. WilderCourt of Appeals of Kentucky · 2001
  5. Stephens v. American International Ins. Co.Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1995

16 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by5 opinions

  1. Ventures v. KingDistrict Court, W.D. Kentucky · 2015
  2. Deans & Homer, Inc. v. Commonwealth, Public Protection Cabinet, Kentucky Department of InsuranceCourt of Appeals of Kentucky · 2014
  3. Meardon v. Freedom Life InsuranceColorado Court of Appeals · 2018
  4. Mitsui Sumitomo Ins. USA, Inc. v. Denham-Blythe Co.District Court, E.D. Kentucky · 2019
  5. Kenneth Alvin O'neil v. Dale Rae Hutchens PersonallyCourt of Appeals of Kentucky · 2021

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API